⚡ EV Model Y

[EmersonHart13]

Tesla Model Y gets official EPA range rating of 315 miles - Autoblog

The Tesla Model Y finally has official EPA numbers available for its range and efficiency.

www.autoblog.com

A 2020 Tesla Model Y Performance will go 315 miles on a full charge, according to final numbers posted to the EPA’s fuel economy site. Forbes spotted the posting first, and they match the numbers that were laid out in Tesla’s Q4 2019 earnings report. Tesla initially promised a range of approximately 280 miles when the Model Y was revealed, but “due to continued engineering progress of the Model Y all-wheel drive,” the number was revised to 315 miles.

The official MPGe rating was also revealed by this posting to the EPA’s site, too, showing that the Model Y received a 121 MPGe combined rating. That makes it the most efficient electric crossover or SUV out there, just beating the Hyundai Kona Electric by a sliver (rated at 120 MPGe). For some further perspective on that MPGe number, the Audi E-Tron is rated at a much lower 74 MPGe combined, and a Jaguar I-Pace at 76 MPGe. Since the Kona’s battery pack is much smaller than the Model Y’s, it can only go 258 miles on a full charge, as opposed to the Tesla’s 315-mile rating.




We’ll also note that this rating is only for the dual-motor Performance trim with all-wheel drive. Tesla estimates the Long Range version at the same 315 miles on its website, but there’s no separate rating on the EPA’s site yet. Both the Model 3 Long Range and Model 3 Performance have the same 322-mile EPA rating for range, so this isn’t an anomaly within Tesla. If you opt for the Model Y Performance with the Performance Upgrade, you get a lowered suspension, performance brakes, larger 21-inch wheels and a higher top speed (155 mph instead of 145 mph). Larger wheels tend to sway EPA range ratings by a significant amount — see the Leaf Plus — and the estimated range falls down to 280 miles on Tesla’s site with this package selected.


Look out for Model Ys to start hitting the streets soon, as production is supposed to begin next month

 

[Mike K]

Meh, I'll believe it when I see it. The Performance Model 3's have the same size battery as the long range rear wheel drive Model 3's and generally don't see anything near their rated range. They are about 100kwh/m less efficient than the long range 3 as well so either the Performance cars won't get their rated range or the non-performance cars are going to go further than their rated range.

I have a real beef with the way Tesla displays usable range. This is one area where they should be like every other car and display range based on recent historical efficiency data. Your gas car doesn't display it's range as the amount of gallons it has in the tank times it's EPA MPG rating. It would be totally misleading and it's totally misleading here. Tesla needs to cut that shit out.

 

[EmersonHart13]

 

[Stink Star]

Meh, I'll believe it when I see it. The Performance Model 3's have the same size battery as the long range rear wheel drive Model 3's and generally don't see anything near their rated range. They are about 100kwh/m less efficient than the long range 3 as well so either the Performance cars won't get their rated range or the non-performance cars are going to go further than their rated range.

I have a real beef with the way Tesla displays usable range. This is one area where they should be like every other car and display range based on recent historical efficiency data. Your gas car doesn't display it's range as the amount of gallons it has in the tank times it's EPA MPG rating. It would be totally misleading and it's totally misleading here. Tesla needs to cut that shit out.

the range on the performance model vs the AWD is only different because of the wheels and tires. The configurator is now setup so performance models are by default “stealth” so they have the same wheels and tires as AWD models. It’s a free add on for the bigger, less efficient wheels and spoiler and such. That’s why the new ones are EPA rated the same

 

[Gone_2022]

I have no issue exceeding the rated range in my Tesla (in its watts per mile). I think to meet the rated range it’s .295 per mile in my car? Anything less = more range anything more obviously drains faster.

Winter time is different with the heater. But spring through fall I can easily do .265 on highway and .240 on route 59 cruising to work.

 

[jason05gt]

I have no issue exceeding the rated range in my Tesla (in its watts per mile). I think to meet the rated range it’s .295 per mile in my car? Anything less = more range anything more obviously drains faster.

Winter time is different with the heater. But spring through fall I can easily do .265 on highway and .240 on route 59 cruising to work.

So during winter are you closer to 200? From what I read and experienced in Colorado (Model X), it's about 30% loss in the cold.

 

[Gone_2022]

So during winter are you closer to 200? From what I read and experienced in Colorado (Model X), it's about 30% loss in the cold.

The higher the number the more you are using electric. So closer to .200 would be far exceeding the rated range.

Winter can vary. Normally when you first set off there is a massive spike in usage as it heats the battery and the cabin to desired temp. Once I get going I normally settle around .330-.360 in winter.

 

[Gone_2022]

My current dash getting in the car. Average from the drive into work when it was 10 degrees out

 

[jason05gt]

The higher the number the more you are using electric. So closer to .200 would be far exceeding the rated range.

Winter can vary. Normally when you first set off there is a massive spike in usage as it heats the battery and the cabin to desired temp. Once I get going I normally settle around .330-.360 in winter.

I was reading on my phone and totally missed the decimals. I thought you meant 260 miles and 240 miles.

 

[Gone_2022]

Ah no. Like MikeK said, they rate their crap on the dash all tech and nerdy. Instead of just making it simple they have what I showed a pic of.

The volt use to display miles per gallon even when on electric and different ways of showing it. Wish Tesla would as well. There is an equation for what “miles per gallon” would be to get Rated range and they should just display that

 

[EmersonHart13]

.

 

[Mike K]

the range on the performance model vs the AWD is only different because of the wheels and tires. The configurator is now setup so performance models are by default “stealth” so they have the same wheels and tires as AWD models. It’s a free add on for the bigger, less efficient wheels and spoiler and such. That’s why the new ones are EPA rated the same

Aren't the stealth cars still seeing higher wh/m rates though? I can pretty easily hit 200 in my car and I think my lifetime is 240 or 245 because I like to accelerate. My neighbor's P3D averages mid 300's, along the lines of my P85D and at that rate he wouldn't be able to even hit the EPA number. I guess I just don't understand how they can rate the performance/ AWD models the same as the rear wheel drive when the rear wheel drive's efficiency numbers are so much better. It means they either nerfed the rear wheel drive numbers or they are overstating the numbers on the AWD cars which seems to be more likely since the forums are littered with people claiming they don't get near the advertised range.

So in that respect, kudos to Porsche.

 

[Stink Star]

Aren't the stealth cars still seeing higher wh/m rates though? I can pretty easily hit 200 in my car and I think my lifetime is 240 or 245 because I like to accelerate. My neighbor's P3D averages mid 300's, along the lines of my P85D and at that rate he wouldn't be able to even hit the EPA number. I guess I just don't understand how they can rate the performance/ AWD models the same as the rear wheel drive when the rear wheel drive's efficiency numbers are so much better. It means they either nerfed the rear wheel drive numbers or they are overstating the numbers on the AWD cars which seems to be more likely since the forums are littered with people claiming they don't get near the advertised range.

So in that respect, kudos to Porsche.

the Awd can get better efficiency due to more ability to collect regeneration. And the model 3 motors are permanent magnet motors, only the newest raven S/X cars have PM motors and I think it’s only the front (iirc) while the others are all traction motors which aren’t nearly as efficient.
As far as the test goes, the EPA makes the test so if tesla gets 390 miles in the S and Porsche gets 205 that’s the only true number you can trust. Sure we all read that latest test where the tesla barely got further than the Porsche and the Porsche got better than expected range but that could be a one off anomaly due to the course setup, one could easily run a test where the S annihilates the Porsche.

The other thing is even though the Porsche has a theoretical faster charge rate there are caveats to that. first off there’s like 3 800v 300kw chargers on earth, and then somebody ran the math based on charge ramp up and down and battery size and found that the tesla actually charges faster per mile for a full charge.

 

[Mike K]

Huge Tesla nutswinger here as we all know... That said, I've been following Tesla for longer than anyone else here. Long enough to remember them touting the benefits of the dual motor cars getting more range and long enough to realize that that claim did not ever materialize for most people. The original P85/ 85 had 265 miles of rated range. The 85D (dual motor) had 270 miles of range. The P85D (performance, dual motor) had 253 miles of range. It lost range compared to the rear wheel drive car. The difference between the the two non-performance setups is 5 miles of rated range. That's a software update and/ or within the margin of error. It's certainly no big win for the dual motor power train.

When the original Model 3 was released it was rated at 310 miles EPA. That was then bumped to 325 via software update even though it was always 325. Tesla specifically asked the EPA to lower the figure to 210, presumably so they could later raise it? Who knows. Then the Model 3 AWD came out with a range of 310 miles. It has been raised to 322. That's the non-performance version, dual motor car, still getting less than the rear wheel drive car. But then you look at what people are getting for wh/m for each car and combine that with the fact that P3D owners by and large complain about not getting near rated range and it paints a different picture. AWD/ P3D's are using about 15% more energy to travel the same distance according to the vehicle's own data. It is highly improbably that two vehicles with the same size battery and two different levels of efficiency would be able to achieve the same range which means that either one vehicle does better than advertised or one does worse. I just can't see how to look at the data and find a different conclusion. And that's my beef with Tesla.

 

[Stink Star]

But the AWD and performance models literally have the same motors. It’s been theorized that the performance variant gets motors that performed exceptionally well during testing, but that could be a rumor just to explain why you can’t software update a LR Dual motor into a performance model. Either way they are the same part, the difference is just programming.

 

[Mike K]

I get that. I'm not disputing that. The performance motors have been the same from the getgo. One guy famously wrote the P85 software to his 85 and turned it into a P85. I'm talking about the fact that the long range all wheel drive cars are less efficient overall than the rear wheel drive cars and yet have similar ranges with the same size battery. That makes no sense.

 

[EmersonHart13]

Is The Model Y Truly The Best Tesla Yet?

We check out YouTube channel Tailosive EV's video where they make the case for why the Model Y is the best Tesla yet.

insideevs.com

 

[Yaj Yak]